San Antonio Statement on Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants

DiGangi, Joseph; Blum, Arlene; Bergman, Åke; Wit, Cynthia A. de; Lucas, Donald; Mortimer, D. C.; Schecter, Arnold; Scheringer, Martin; Shaw, Susan D.; Webster, Thomas F.

doi:10.1289/ehp.1003089

Cited by 74 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2010 a group of over 100 eminent environmental scientists signed the San Antonio statement on halogenated flame retardants [81] condemning their continued use and requesting urgent remedial action. These persistent organic pollutants (POPs) take several years to break down in the environment, are bioaccumulative (they accumulate in plants and animals, becoming more concentrated as they move up the food chain), and are toxic.…”

Section: Fire Retardantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Stec

2017

Fire Safety Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fire toxicity is the largest cause of death and injury from unwanted fires, yet it is the least well studied area of fire science and engineering. Fire toxicity increases by factors up to 50, as the fire becomes underventilated. This has proved difficult, but not impossible, to replicate in a controlled way on a bench-scale. Clear correlations have been observed between the stoichiometric equivalence ratio, and the yields of the major asphyxiants, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. In addition, irritant components of fire effluents, which have an instantaneous effect, can incapacitate fire victims, trapping them in a fire. However, the longer term toxicants present in fire effluents, such as the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and the microscopic particulates which result from their agglomeration are probably responsible for hundreds or thousands more deaths than the acute asphyxiants and irritants.

show abstract

Section: Fire Retardantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Stec

2017

Fire Safety Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the past decades halogen based flame retardants, in particular the reactive tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), have been used to suppress the flammability of EP [3]. However this leads to the production of corrosive, obscuring smoke and toxic halogenated compounds during the combustion of halogenated structures [4]. Therefore, some brominated compounds will be gradually phased out to comply with new environmental legislation [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalytic pyrolysis and flame retardancy of epoxy resins with solid acid boron phosphate

Zhou

Feng

Peng

et al. 2014

Polymer Degradation and Stability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A number of detailed studies have demonstrated the toxicity of these releases to humans and animals [20]. In 2010, a group of over 200 concerned scientists signed the San Antonio statement on brominated and chlorinated flame retardants [21] questioning their continued use and requesting urgent remedial action. The flame retardants currently causing concern are small molecules which can easily migrate through the polymer matrix, with consequent release into the environment.…”

Section: Drivers For the Replacement Of Brominated Flame Retardantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of gas phase flame retardants on fire effluent toxicity

Molyneux

Stec

Hull

2014

Polymer Degradation and Stability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard industry formulations of flame retarded aliphatic polyamides, meeting UL 94 V-0, have been burned under controlled conditions, and the yields of the major asphyxiants, carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen cyanide (HCN) have been quantified. Although both the combination of aluminium phosphinate and melamine polyphosphate, and the combination of brominated polystyrene and antimony oxide, inhibit combustion reactions in the gas phase, this study shows that the phosphorus causes a much smaller increase in the CO and HCN yields than antimonybromine. The mechanisms of CO and HCN generation and destruction are related to the flame inhibition reactions. Both CO and HCN form early in the flame, and the OH radical is critical for their destruction. Crucial, in the context of the flame inhibition mechanism, is the observation that the phosphorus system reduces the H and O radical concentrations without a corresponding decrease in the OH radical concentration; conversely, the bromine system reduces all three of the key radical concentrations, H, O and OH, and thus increases the fire toxicity, by inhibiting decomposition of CO and HCN. Moreover, while the phosphorus flame retardant is effective as an ignition suppressant at lower temperatures (corresponding to early flaming), this is effect "switches off" at high temperatures, minimising the potential increase in fire toxicity, once the fire develops. Since flame retardants are most effective as ignition suppressants, and at the early stages of flaming combustion, while most fire deaths and injuries result from toxic gas inhalation from more developed fires, it is clearly advantageous to have an effective gas phase flame retardant which only causes a small increase in the toxic product yields.

show abstract

San Antonio Statement on Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants

Abstract: San Antonio Statement on Brominated and Chlorinated Flame Retardants (Signatories as of publication date. Institutions are for identification purposes only.

Cited by 74 publications

References 64 publications

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Fire toxicity – The elephant in the room?

Catalytic pyrolysis and flame retardancy of epoxy resins with solid acid boron phosphate

The effect of gas phase flame retardants on fire effluent toxicity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About